The Supreme Court finds lack of evidence and procedural lapses in the circumstantial case against Mehtab and his co-accused, acquitting them of all charges.
In a landmark judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India, the Court has acquitted Mehtab and his co-accused in a high-profile murder case from Uttarakhand. The appellants were previously sentenced to death by the trial court and their conviction was upheld by the High Court of Uttarakhand. The apex court found significant procedural lapses and inconsistencies in the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The case revolved around the alleged murder and sexual assault of a 55-year-old woman, Munni Devi, which occurred on December 29, 2012, in a forest near Dehradun, Uttarakhand. The prosecution's case was solely based on circumstantial evidence, including the "last seen together" theory and various recoveries allegedly linking the accused to the crime. However, the Supreme Court noted that the prosecution had failed to establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances pointing unerringly to the guilt of the accused.
The Supreme Court highlighted serious procedural lapses, including the failure to conduct a Test Identification Parade (TIP), which is crucial in cases involving suspects who are strangers to the witnesses. The Court expressed skepticism about the sketches used to identify the accused, as the sketch artist was neither identified nor examined during the trial. Moreover, the Supreme Court found issues with the chain of custody of forensic samples, which rendered the forensic reports unreliable.
The judgment further pointed out the lack of credible evidence to establish a motive for the crime, as the medical evidence contradicted the possibility of sexual assault by one of the accused. The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of proving each incriminating circumstance beyond reasonable doubt in cases based on circumstantial evidence and concluded that the prosecution had failed to do so in this case.
Both the trial court and the High Court were criticized for overlooking the patent infirmities and loopholes in the prosecution's case. The Supreme Court's decision to acquit the accused is seen as a significant affirmation of the principles of criminal jurisprudence, particularly the need for a robust and unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence to sustain a conviction.
The appellants, who have been in jail since their conviction, will be released immediately unless they are wanted in any other cases. This judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of diligent investigation and adherence to procedural protocols in criminal cases.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 376(2)(g), 201 read with Section 34; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 3(2)(v); Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 313, Section 366, Section 374(2); Evidence Act, 1872 - Forensic evidence.
Mehtab v. State of Uttarakhand, (SC) : Law Finder Doc id # 2907515
